Commonwealth v. Canon’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
8 district · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Commonwealth v. Garcia (1980), Yorke v. Taylor (1955)
8 district · 48 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 203
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green · United States v. Lovasco · Dutton v. Evans
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whoever, being a present or former state, county or municipal employee or member of the judiciary, or person selected to be such an employee or member of the judiciary, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly, asks, demands, exacts, solicits, seeks, accepts, receives or agrees to receive anything of substantial value for himself for or because of any official act or act within his official responsibility performed or to be performed by him ... shall be punished by a fine of not more than three thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than two years, or both.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[T]he jury system provides the most important means by which laymen can participate in and understand the legal system. “It makes them feel that they owe duties to society, and that they have a share in its government.... The jury system has for some hundreds of years been constantly bringing the rules of latv to the touchstone of contemporary common sense.” 13”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Actual cross-examination at the prior [proceeding] is not required, but the party against whom the testimony is now offered must have had an adequate opportunity to exercise the right to cross-examine if desired.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.